>None taken, I agree, there is no absolute proof. However I do find
>good indications that there are Invisible Pink Unicorn, whereas I find
>no evidence that there is a God. Therefore I have no qualms deciding
>to accept one and toss out the other.

Well, I'm not going to get into an extensive argument of this nature, there are 
plenty of books out there that cover the evidence for Christianity and it goes 
far beyond "we can't see God because he is invisible" which is the extent of 
the logic for pink unicorns existing (or FSM or any other God parody you decide 
to go with). Keep in mind that much of the basis of Christianity is on the 
personage of Jesus and his resurrection. It goes far beyond "we think there's a 
God but we can't see him" which is the only logic that these parodies address. 
What these *do* address is proponents of ID that try to pretend like it's not 
really an attempt to twist science into a fundamentalist creationism position, 
and that a "designer" is just some invisible entity in charge of everything. I 
don't get offended by the FSM or such parodies, I think they are rather funny 
and do a good job of illustrating the problems with ID approaches. But do I 
think they even come close to showing Christianity to be illogical? Not at all. 
Again, I can see someone looking at the same information and evidence that I do 
and coming to a different conclusion (something that scientists do ALL the 
time). But one has to wonder how much of that has to do with personal bias and 
what we *want* the answer to be. And yes, that goes both ways. There definitely 
are people that try to ignore anything that might for instance, prove something 
in the Bible incorrect, or that might go against their beliefs in any way. But 
just as often, I see people that want to take a non-religious position take 
extremely unscientific and illogical approaches to making that argument. Just 
as I've seen scientists, doctors, etc. draw conclusions where the data simply 
isn't there to support it. Taking an truly unbiased approach to finding truth 
is something I've seen very, very rarely in my life. So to say that believing 
in God is no different than believing in pink unicorns is simply a bad 
argument, because it is only addressing *one* aspect of what that belief is 
based on. 

--- Mary Jo


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know 
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:306402
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5

Reply via email to